The court established that the interest awarded should not exceed 6% per annum as per Section 34 of the C.P.C. and considered the plaintiff's lack of seriousness in pressing the claim for interest.

JUDGMENT :

1. The instant First Appeal has been filed by the appellant/defendant under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 challenging the order dated 31.03.2006 (Annexure A/1) passed by learned Fourth Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court) Raigarh (C.G.) in Civil Suit 10A/2004 (Vijay Kumar Agrawal v. Smt. Kesharbai Kalar & another) whereby decree was passed in favour of respondent No. 1 and the appellant was directed to pay Rs. 80,000/- along with interest @ 12% per annum from 20.09.2001 till actual payment is paid by the appellant.

2. The brief facts, as reflected from record, are that the respondent No. 1/plaintiff has filed a Civil Suit No. 10A/2004 for specific performance of contract and for grant of permanent injunction contending that the plaintiff has executed an agreement with defendant No. 1 to purchase the suit land total 19 Nos. Khasra, area admeasuring 3.064 Hectare situated at Village- Sodka, Patwari Halka No. 17, Tahsil- Kharsiya, District- Raigarh for Rs. 80,000/- per acre vide agreement dated 20.09.2001. The details of the suit land are mentioned in Schedule-A of the plaint. On the date of agreement i.e. on 20.09.2001, plaintiff/ respondent No. 1 has given Rs. 80,000/- to the appellant and she has given assurance that she will execute the sale deed within one year. The respondent No. 1 has made attempt for many times for his part of specific performance of contract, but the appellant/defendant for the reason best known to her, has tried to avoid.

3. The plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his part of contract, but the appellant/ defendant neither performed her part of contract nor returned the amount of Rs. 80,000/-, which she has received towards advance, therefore, he has filed the civil suit for specific performance of the contract on 20.09.2001. The defendant has orally informed that her mother has not given any oral consent for sale of the property, as such, he has filed the civil suit for execution of ½ share of the appellant’s land admeasuring 1.532 Hectare.

4. The appellant/defendant has filed written submission, in which, it has been contended that the defendant No. 1 & her mother- Jeera Bai are in possession of the land not the Jeera Bai alone is in possession of the land. She has not made any agreement with the plaintiff for sale of the land on 20.09.2001 @ Rs. 80,000/- per acre. Before execution of that agreement, no consent has been obtained by Jeera Bai. It has also been contended that the allegation made in the plaint is false and fabricated as there is no requirement of the defendant of her mother for any money and neither they have made any agreement for sale of the land. In fact, the actual rate of the land is 1,50,000/- as such, the allegation made by the plaintiff is false and fabricated and would pray that the suit is not maintainable against the defendant. It has also been contended that no notice was issued to the plaintiff and the sale agreement is not binding upon defendant No. 1 for sale of land.

5. Learned Court below has framed six issues. The plaintiff/respondent No. 1 examined himself and defendant has not examined himself. Learned trial Court after appreciating the evidence, material on record has given finding that appellant/ defendant has executed agreement on 20.09.2001 and also received Rs. 80,000/-, since it is joint property, therefore, the agreement executed by one person is voidable agreement, therefore, no specific performance of the contract can be ordered.

6. It has also been recorded by the trial court that it is for the plaintiff to plead ready and willingness regarding performance of his part of contract, no documentary evidence has been adduced and it has also been recorded by the trial Court that the plaintiff has not proved any document that he was having Rs. 4 lac or in the account maintained by him for execution of sale-deed. Learned trial Court after appreciating the evidence, material on record has passed the judgment and decree has direct